RAPS.org needs your explicit consent to store browser cookies. If you don't allow cookies, you may not be able to use certain features of the web site such as personalized content. Please see our Privacy Policy for more information.

About the Regulatory Profession

The regulatory function is vital in making safe and effective healthcare products available worldwide. Individuals who ensure regulatory compliance and prepare submissions, as well as those whose main job function is clinical affairs or quality assurance are all considered regulatory professionals.

Regulatory Code of Ethics

One of our most valuable contributions to the profession is the Regulatory Code of Ethics. The Code of Ethics provides regulatory professionals with core values that hold them to the highest standards of professional conduct.

Regulatory Competency Framework

Like all professions, regulatory is based on a shared set of competencies. The Regulatory Competency Framework describes the essential elements of what is required of regulatory professionals at four major career and professional levels.

Regulatory Convergence

Join the brightest minds in regulatory at the annual Regulatory Convergence. See the global regulatory community in action. Intensive workshops. Topical sessions. Meet ups with regulators. This is where it all comes together.

New: Take the RAC Exam Online

The site navigation utilizes arrow, enter, escape, and space bar key commands. Left and right arrows move
across top level links and expand / close menus in sub levels. Up and Down arrows will open main level
menus and toggle through sub tier links. Enter and space open menus and escape closes them as well. Tab
will move on to the next part of the site rather than go through menu items.

The regulatory function is vital in making safe and effective healthcare products available worldwide. Individuals who ensure regulatory compliance and prepare submissions, as well as those whose main job function is clinical affairs or quality assurance are all considered regulatory professionals.

One of our most valuable contributions to the profession is the Regulatory Code of Ethics. The Code of Ethics provides regulatory professionals with core values that hold them to the highest standards of professional conduct.

Like all professions, regulatory is based on a shared set of competencies. The Regulatory Competency Framework describes the essential elements of what is required of regulatory professionals at four major career and professional levels.

Join the brightest minds in regulatory at the annual Regulatory Convergence. See the global regulatory community in action. Intensive workshops. Topical sessions. Meet ups with regulators. This is where it all comes together.

RAPS is closely monitoring developments in the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. See our public safety page for the latest updates.

The RAPS store will be under maintenance Saturday, 13 June between 6 AM and 12 PM EST. Store functionality may be unavailable at times during this window.
We apologize for any inconvenience caused during this time.

The public comment period on FDA’s draft guidance closed with 90 submissions, including from PhRMA, Roche/Genentech, the Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard (MRCT Center), the National Center for Health Research (NCHR), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the National Association for Rare Disorders (NORD), among others.

Most commenters generally support the issuance of the draft guidance as a step in the right direction to enhance diversity in clinical trials. Yet several ask for references to or discussion about the role of RWD/RWE, touting the use of sources like registries to help fill in gaps of information. Friends of Cancer Research (FOCR) and Roche/Genentech say that FDA should cite its work to advance the use of RWE to better reflect real-world patient populations.

FDA has been exploring additional ways to further support industry use of RWE as part of clinical studies under the agency’s RWE framework, released last December. The commenters argue for the RWD/RWE efforts to be more supportive of enhancing diversity in trial populations.

The MRCT Center recommends addressing the use of RWD/RWE “to help collect clinical data in diverse patient populations, particularly for later phase studies and potentially to decrease the number of subjects needed for clinical studies.” PhRMA “encourages FDA to consider how RWE/ RWD may be used to help provide information on effects of the drug in broader patient population.” The research and policy center and PhRMA say that RWE/RWD have the potential to complement and support clinical trial results while increasing the diversity of patients studied.

There is also consensus across commenters for the guidance to note how to make the best use of patient input for informing clinical trial designs and to describe strategies to improve enrollment for unrepresented patients in clinical trials based on demographics versus non-demographics.

“FDA should consider referencing these activities and note the role of patient input in informing clinical trial designs, identifying the needs of specific patient populations, and recognizing opportunities to reduce patient burden,” says FOCR. PhRMA and the MRCT Center echo this recommendation. The MRCT Center believes “the role of participant/patient/public engagement throughout the clinical trial planning and conduct process could be expanded in the document, and reference to the FDA guidance on Patient-Focused Drug Development would be helpful.”

The draft guidance lacks a clear distinction between demographics versus non-demographics, according to PhRMA, the MRCT Center and Bridge Clinical Research. “It would be important to include examples of exclusion criteria based on demographic criteria, and examples of broadening eligibility and recruitment strategies in these populations,” the MRCT Center writes.

BIO, NCHR and ASCO also note the need for incentivizing the adoption of the drafted requirements, once finalized, to achieve the aim of the guidance. “The degree of impact for proposed changes will depend upon clarity in the final guidance and FDA’s willingness to enforce and/or incentivize adoption of these requirements on sponsors and research programs,” BIO notes.

NORD and ASCO laud the draft guidance and show support for a range of proposals, from engaging with patient groups early on in the drug development process to re-enrolling patients from early-phase trials into later-phase trials. Yet ASCO requests more guidance, including on the transition from dose escalation to the cohort expansion phase.

Several commenters also request the inclusion of additional strategies to increase participation for underrepresented populations by increasing the number of specific subgroups, including transgender individuals, African Americans, Latinos, Asians, women and elderly patients.